What happened
Prominent filmmakers Matti Haapoja and Sam "Kold" Kolder posted videos demonstrating Higgsfield's Seedance 2.5 AI tool without labeling them as ads. Screenshots of partnership offers from Higgsfield's PR firms surfaced online, revealing the creators were working with the company; neither creator nor Higgsfield disclosed whether these were paid partnerships to The Verge. Kolder's video caption appeared to contain an affiliate link offering a 30 percent discount on an annual Higgsfield subscription.
Why it matters
Creators who build large followings do so by appearing trustworthy and aligned with their audiences' values. By endorsing generative AI—a technology many see as a threat—without transparent disclosure, Haapoja and Kolder risked signaling to followers that they are willing to compromise that trust. The backlash mirrors earlier fallout when OpenAI brought influencers to a luxury resort in New York for a "Summer Club" retreat, showing that AI company partnerships carry particular reputational risk for creators whose appeal rests on human creativity.
What to watch
Kolder's video received mixed reactions on YouTube, with some praising it as "absolute cinema!" while others lamented "AI defeated our king." Haapoja faced sharper criticism on Threads, including from peer Marques Brownlee, who pushed back on Haapoja's comparison of generative AI to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, noting that unlike that physical camera, gen AI is "trained on real human-made material without any credit."
Summaries like this, in your inbox every morning.
The Haapoja and Kolder incident exposes a tension in creator-brand partnerships: while such deals are common today, they carry outsized risk when the brand is generative AI. Both creators built followings by positioning themselves as skilled filmmakers whose work reflects human creativity—Haapoja as a tech explainer and Kolder as a professional video editor. By promoting AI video tools without transparent sponsorship disclosure, they signaled to audiences that they either endorse AI as a replacement for human work or are willing to accept payment to do so. The lack of disclosure amplified the perception that the videos were advertisements rather than genuine creative exploration. Marques Brownlee's criticism on Threads—specifically that generative AI lacks the consent and attribution that traditional tools like the Canon EOS 5D Mark II demand—crystallized a core concern: AI companies train on human work without credit, making their endorsement feel like a betrayal of creative labor itself. The comparison to OpenAI's earlier "Summer Club" retreat suggests this is not an isolated misstep but a pattern in how AI companies cultivate influencer goodwill, and a growing cost to creators who accept such partnerships.
Pick your industry and the AI tools you use, and get news related to your work every day.
Free · 30 seconds with Google · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →
Ask AI anything about this article. The AI reads this article, earlier AIToday articles, and Wikipedia, and cites its sources. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.
